Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 25352 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2003 15:15:09 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Sep 2003 15:15:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 49560 invoked by uid 500); 23 Sep 2003 15:13:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 49487 invoked by uid 500); 23 Sep 2003 15:13:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 49451 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2003 15:13:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO exchange.sun.com) (192.18.33.10) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Sep 2003 15:13:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 15814 invoked by uid 50); 23 Sep 2003 15:16:54 -0000 Date: 23 Sep 2003 15:16:54 -0000 Message-ID: <20030923151654.15813.qmail@nagoya.betaversion.org> From: bugzilla@apache.org To: dev@ant.apache.org Cc: Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20618] - class org.apache.tools.ant.util.regexp.Jdk14RegexpMatcher X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20618 class org.apache.tools.ant.util.regexp.Jdk14RegexpMatcher bodewig@apache.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From bodewig@apache.org 2003-09-23 15:16 ------- I've always been bad with names and Ant's sources tell a lot of stories about this (even Erik and Steve tell them in their book, thankfully without pointing fingers). I admit, I've been the one who called the method match and used a misleading name. The behavior we have is more a partialMatch or something - and is the behavior most of the applications of that method inside Ant need. So yes, the name is wrong and we can't change for backwards compatibility. If you need exact matching, anchoring your pattern with ^ and $ is the way to go. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org